or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › killing Trayvon
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

killing Trayvon - Page 287

post #4291 of 6250
2009 data

post #4292 of 6250
AZNs win again
post #4293 of 6250
For those that actually care about statistics....from US DoJ.

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/ascii/htus8008.txt

Quote:
In the last decade (since 2000) the homicide rate declined to
levels last seen in the mid-1960s

In 1980 the rate peaked at 10.2 per 100,000 and
subsequently fell to 7.9 per 100,000 in 1984.

The homicide rate declined sharply from 9.3 homicides per
100,000 in 1992 to 4.8 homicides per 100,000 in 2010.

The demographic characteristics of homicide victims and
offenders were different from the characteristics of the
general population

Blacks were disproportionately represented as both homicide
victims and offenders. The victimization rate for blacks
(27.8 per 100,000) was 6 times higher than the rate for
whites (4.5 per 100,000). The offending rate for blacks (34.4
per 100,000) was almost 8 times higher than the rate for
whites (4.5 per 100,000)
post #4294 of 6250
Yes. And if you replace race with economic status the numbers will be similar.
post #4295 of 6250
What happened to TM is terrible and I wish it hadn't had happened but we do live in a nation governed by laws not some banana republic. GZ was found not guilty and should be left alone to live his life. This, unfortunately, looks like it won't be the case.

The manufactured (some government sponsored) outrage over this case is really astounding (scary) to me. As noted above, you've got black on black crime occurring at an alarming rate - where are the national calls to stop the violence? Why isn't Jessie Jackson holding candle light vigils for Detroit, Atlanta, or New York teens innocently killed over drugs, basketball shoes or some minor grievance? Its pathetic and shameful if you ask me and until the hypocrisy (or irony) stops we aren't going to get any closer to helping curb violence.
post #4296 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hayward View Post

Basically, SYG extends your "castle" to your "bubble," provided you are some place where you have a legal right to be. In most other states, if you're outside your home, you have a duty to retreat from danger before taking action. If you are pursued and therefore prevented from taking refuge, you are entitled to take proportional action. Inside your domicile most places there is a "castle doctrine", meaning that if someone invades your home and menaces you, it's assumed you have no ready means to avoid any attack, and so are entitled to take action, and it generally does not need to be limited proportionally.

We don't have any wording at all that resembles a duty to retreat in Missouri under any circumstances. We also don't have any case law to reference on the subject as well. To me it would be prudent and just common sense that if you can avoid a situation then you do so. However I'm with Harvey on this one. If someone waves a knife in someone's face they shouldn't have to try to negotiate a way out before they take self defense actions. That's the talk of someone who is trying to be politically correct and disingenuous IMO.
post #4297 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hayward View Post

Yes. And if you replace race with economic status the numbers will be similar.
No they won't....
post #4298 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by whnay. View Post

2009 data


Can I add to this that the FBI statistics count Hispanics as white--just like CNN! And Hispanics commit a disproportionate amount of "white" on black crime, though the numbers are hard to pin down because of how the government keeps the statistics. But here's one telling piece of info:
Quote:
The Scripps study found that the greatest incidence of white-on-black killings, as a percentage of all homicides, are found in New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Nevada, Massachusetts, Florida, New Jersey, Delaware, California and Maryland.

...

But states like Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi and South Carolina all have white-on-black murder rates well below the national average, even though these states have large black populations.

http://www.standard.net/stories/2012/04/23/interracial-murder-rate-growing-us
post #4299 of 6250
So Holder just couldn't resist.... just heard something about what he said on the news break.

http://thehill.com/video/administration/311053-holder-trayvon-martin-death-unnecessary-tragic
post #4300 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by whnay. View Post

What happened to TM is terrible and I wish it hadn't had happened but we do live in a nation governed by laws not some banana republic. GZ was found not guilty and should be left alone to live his life. This, unfortunately, looks like it won't be the case.

The manufactured (some government sponsored) outrage over this case is really astounding (scary) to me. As noted above, you've got black on black crime occurring at an alarming rate - where are the national calls to stop the violence? Why isn't Jessie Jackson holding candle light vigils for Detroit, Atlanta, or New York teens innocently killed over drugs, basketball shoes or some minor grievance? Its pathetic and shameful if you ask me and until the hypocrisy (or irony) stops we aren't going to get any closer to helping curb violence.

He's not doing it because the golden days of race hustling are over.

He and Al have to pick their spots carefully these days and the Trayvon case was/is perfect. Note though Jesse and Al are not nearly as engaged as when the case started and they were in the forefront stirring up shit.

From your perch, high up, you might not realize that times are tough Bill. Jesse J's boy Jesse Jr. had to steal to maintain his lifestyle. That wouldn't have happened in the golden days.
post #4301 of 6250
from a Google search:

http://www.bet.com/news/national/2012/06/15/rev-jesse-jackson-takes-on-black-on-black-violence.html

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/story/2012-06-12/jesse-jackson-gun-violence-marches/55527742/1

You might disagree with his strategy for reducing black-on-black violence, but it seems inaccurate to say that he's ignoring the problem. Unless you mean, at this very moment--which would be odd, since he's talking about the Zimmerman case, just like lots of people have been.
post #4302 of 6250
post #4303 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ataturk View Post

Can I add to this that the FBI statistics count Hispanics as white--just like CNN! And Hispanics commit a disproportionate amount of "white" on black crime, though the numbers are hard to pin down because of how the government keeps the statistics. But here's one telling piece of info:
http://www.standard.net/stories/2012/04/23/interracial-murder-rate-growing-us

Obviously the police there cover up the murders because they don't think blacks deserve to live!
post #4304 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by erictheobscure View Post

from a Google search:

http://www.bet.com/news/national/2012/06/15/rev-jesse-jackson-takes-on-black-on-black-violence.html

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/story/2012-06-12/jesse-jackson-gun-violence-marches/55527742/1

You might disagree with his strategy for reducing black-on-black violence, but it seems inaccurate to say that he's ignoring the problem. Unless you mean, at this very moment--which would be odd, since he's talking about the Zimmerman case, just like lots of people have been.
Fair enough but he saves most of his outrage for cases like this one.
post #4305 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by itsstillmatt View Post

Didn't Zimmerman not invoke stand your ground?

Quote:
Originally Posted by dopey View Post

Really? Would you post that? It makes no sense since Zimmerman didn't make that claim. In any case, even if the Judge mentioned it, it is still impossible to see how anyone paying attention to the case could think it was a factor. But I suppose I should wait to see how the Judge used it.


Edit:Never mind. I found it. The Judge was speaking English (or trying) and not referring to the "Stand Your Ground" law. It was standard "no duty to retreat" language. If people have a beef with that, they must mean that you should be obligated to retreat from danger if possible rather than defend yourself.

BTW, the Coates piece is seriously unhinged. He acknowledges that Zimmerman should have been acquitted but concludes with this anyway:

Some argue that even if the defense did not use it, it did very much impact the case:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/15/us/in-zimmerman-case-self-defense-was-hard-to-topple.html?hp&_r=1&pagewanted=all&

Mr. O’Mara said he did not rely on Stand Your Ground as a defense because Mr. Zimmerman had no option to retreat. A pretrial immunity hearing, which prosecutors said they had been expecting, would only have divulged his case. So Mr. O’Mara gambled on a jury trial.

“That was a brilliant strategic move,” Mr. Sharpstein said. “It precluded the state from previewing the defense.”

But Stand Your Ground did play a role when the police were contemplating whether to charge Mr. Zimmerman, said Tamara Lave, an associate professor of law at the University of Miami.

Under the law, if the police believe there is probable cause that someone acted in self-defense, as Mr. Zimmerman said he had, they are not allowed to make an arrest, she said. The self-defense claim also may have affected how thoroughly the police interviewed witnesses, preserved the crime scene and screened Mr. Zimmerman.

Eventually, the police arrested Mr. Zimmerman, but only after Gov. Rick Scott of Florida had appointed Ms. Corey as prosecutor.

At a news conference after the verdict, Ms. Corey said prosecutors had been hindered by the fact they inherited the case well into the investigation. Still, she forged ahead.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Events, Power and Money
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › killing Trayvon